The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
how a food tastes to you is probably very different than how it tastes to somebody else. The same probably cannot be said of something like vision or hearing, unless you're somebody who has perfect pitch or your color vision is disrupted, or you're a mantis shrimp, chances are when we look at the same object two people are seeing more or less the same object or perceiving it in a very similar way.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.